VARIANCE PROCEDURE - ZONING (PROCESS TYPE III-A)

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "VARIANCE PROCEDURE - ZONING (PROCESS TYPE III-A)"

Andra McDowell
5 years ago
Views:

VARIANE PROEDURE - ZONING (PROESS YPE III-A) (PLEASE PRIN LEARLY OR YPE IN BLUE OR BLAK INK) Application Requirements: A completed Land Use Application form All of the materials and information

1 VARIANE PROEDURE - ZONING (PROESS YPE III-A) (PLEASE PRIN LEARLY OR YPE IN BLUE OR BLAK INK) Application Requirements: A completed Land Use Application form All of the materials and information required by this form SEPA hecklist, if applicable Application fee payment ransportation concurrency certificate, if applicable Mailing list and labels for 5 foot radius Project Data: 1. Nature of Request See Attachment "A", Item #1 2. an the subject property be reasonably used under the existing regulations of the Land Use Ordinance? Explain: See Attachment "A", Item #2 3. What impact will the proposed variance have upon the physical environment of the area? 4. heck one High Moderate Minimal Explain: See Attachment "A", Item #4 5. What impact will your proposed variance have upon the character and quality of the neighborhood, aesthetic considerations, views, etc? heck one High Moderate Minimal Explain: See Attachment "A", Item #5 PLN - Variance Revised: 1/27/212 2

2 APPLIAN JUSIFIAION General Provisions A. A variance is a modification of the terms of this ordinance. he Hearing Examiner may grant a variance only if the applicant proves to the Hearing Examiner's satisfaction that because of the unusual shape, exceptional topographic conditions, or other extraordinary situation or condition in connection with a specific piece of property the literal enforcement of the ordinance would involve practical difficulties and cause undue hardship unnecessary to carry out the spirit and intent of this ordinance. B. An application for a variance may be submitted for modification of any term or requirement of this ordinance except for the following: (1) o allow a use not generally permitted (either as a principal or conditional use) in the general use type in which the subject property is located, or (2) o authorize a permitted use upon less site area than what is specified as the minimum site area. (3) Sign code modifications, except that holders of billboard relocation permits may apply for variances to performance standards for height, setback, and spacing (as below). Variances to the Billboard Overlay Zone designations, Bellingham Municipal ode 2.8.2, Figure 15 shall not be granted. No variances to billboard face size, number of billboard faces, or number of billboard structures shall be granted. Variances from minimum spacing requirements shall not exceed 1% of the minimum spacing requirement. (4) Definitions of this code Variance riteria A. Variances can be granted by the Hearing Examiner if the applicant proves to the Hearing Examiner that the following criteria are satisfied: (1) Because of special circumstances, not the result of the owner's action, applicable to the subject property, (including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings) the strict application of the provisions of this ordinance is found to deprive the property of rights and privileges enjoyed by other property in the area and under the identical land use classification; and (2) hat the granting of the variance will not be unduly detrimental to the public welfare nor injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and subarea in which the subject property is located. (3) hat the subject property cannot be reasonably used under the regulations as written. HE BURDEN OF PROOF FOR HE VARIANE SHALL BE HE SOLE RESPONSIBILIY OF HE APPLIAN. State the facts relating to the subject property in a clear and precise manner. 1. Explain what exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions exist in connection with the subject property (including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings) which would cause undue hardship or involve practical difficulties if the Land Use Ordinance is strictly enforced. he plight of the applicant must be unique and not be the result of the applicant's own action. See Attachment "B", Item #1 PLN - Variance Revised: 1/27/212 3

3 2. Explain why the strict application of the Land Use Ordinance would deprive you of privileges possessed by owners of other property in the same land use designation and vicinity. See Attachment "B", Item #2 3. Explain why the granting of said variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements of the vicinity or land use designation in which the subject property is located. See Attachment "B", Item #3 PLANS REQUIRED Submit three (3) sets of scaled plans and one 8 1/2 x 11 reduction illustrating the following: 1. A standard scaled site plan showing: a. Subject site property lines. b. All existing and proposed buildings. c. Adjoining streets. d. Parking facilities and access: Label proposed and existing, show surfacing, drainage and parking stall dimensions. e. Show any physical features of consequences (creeks, wetlands, topography or grade changes, significant trees or vegetation, etc.) 2. Scaled building plans, if applicable to request, showing: a. A side view(s) (elevation) of the building. b. Floor plans. 3. Any plans, drawings, or photos that help illustrate the variance. Depending on the nature of the project, additional plans may be required NOE: 1. Staff will schedule applications on the Hearing Examiner's agenda, allowing sufficient time for staff review and legal notifications. his time will vary, but the minimum amount of time required is four (4) weeks prior to the hearing/meeting date. 2. Under no circumstances should the applicant discuss the application with the Hearing Examiner prior to the public hearing. 3. he applicant or an authorized representative must be present at the public hearing. PLN - Variance Revised: 1/27/212 4

4 Attachment A Project Data 1. Nature of Request: his request affects Buildings One and wo. For ease of discussion we are referring to them as a single building due to consistent elevation and height. onsideration of a variance from the 35-foot height requirement in accordance with BM B. 4.a. to allow structures with a height of 58 feet. he height restriction and proposed height are measured in accordance with Height Definition No. 1. BM B.4.a. does not allow the use of Height Definition No. 2 for structures located within 2 feet of property with a residential area not designed planned. If it were allowed, as it is on Buildings hree through Four and the clubhouse, then the height would be 36 feet. he attached site plan is provided for building number and topographic reference only; we are only requesting a height variance. 2. an the subject property be reasonably used under the existing regulations of the Land Use Ordinance? No. his site is encumbered with a 1 wetlands setback, a 2 height restriction overlay (from single family zoning), and a right-of-way dedication for onsolidation Avenue. ombined, these affect 47.2% of the site area. Due to these encumbrances, we are not able to reasonably develop the site. We cannot realistically provide the allowed density of 176 units (we are proposing 164 units). We certainly could not do so without greatly impacting the neighbors on Nevada Street and on Marrionberry ourt. While the variance request affects two of four proposed buildings, the choice was made to place two buildings in the 2 height restriction overlay so as to minimize any impact on Nevada St. neighbors. his allows us to reasonably use the site that is zoned and approved for our proposed use while minimizing neighborhood impacts. 4. What impact will the proposed variance have upon the physical environment of the area? he proposed design, with the variance, will impose less impact on the site than is allowed. With a smaller number of buildings, and taller ones, we will be able to disturb less of the existing land and therefore not restrict or impact access to light and air. Our setbacks are significantly more than what is required. Our density is less than is allowed (176 units allowed, 164 units proposed). And fortunately we will not impact views; and in fact, will improve them. he Puget Neighborhood Guidelines call for retaining wooded areas. We are doing so by minimizing the number of buildings, making them an appropriate height, and leaving large areas of the site untouched and/or re-vegetated. 5. What impact will your proposed variance have upon the character and quality of the neighborhood, aesthetic considerations, views, etc? Due to the slope of the existing site and the slope and location of Puget Street, the height of the buildings will have minimal to no impact on the neighborhood. he site slopes down at an average grade of 22% away from Puget Street. Puget Street slopes up and then veers away from the site as it continues south. At the highest point, the buildings will be even with the elevation of Puget Street centerline and thus much below the lowest floors of houses that are on Puget Street. At the lowest point, the buildings will be 18.5 feet below the elevation of Puget Street. (See the attached site sections). he development will allow for the enhancement of views for the neighbors along Puget, as well as for pedestrians and drivers on Puget. We project proponents have heard that the Puget neighbors support our project and support some clearing of trees and brush to enhance their views. Please refer to the enclosed rendering of the future view from the neighbor's residence on Puget Street based upon the calculations proposed in this request. Regarding the neighbors to the south

5 (across onsolidation Avenue ROW), there will be no significant difference for views of those neighbors. he building will be nearly 16 away from the onsolidation Avenue ROW and that entire area is wooded. We intend to leave as much of it in its natural state as we can. It should be noted that the ownership of this site had previously deeded the 15 acres directly to the north of this site to the ity of Bellingham which shall remain as designated open space to enhance the quality of the neighborhood and will guarantee that wooded areas are retained as outlined in the Puget Neighborhood Guidelines. his deed transfer along with the resulting benefit to the neighborhood was negotiated with the ity, and agreed upon in order to allow for up to 176 multi-family units to be constructed on the subject property. For the above mentioned reasons, the impact to the character and quality of the neighborhood will be a positive one. Attachment B Applicant Justification / Variance riteria 1. Explain what exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions exist in connection with the subject property (including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings) which would cause undue hardship or involve practical difficulties if the Land Use Ordinance is strictly enforced. he plight of the applicant must be unique and not be the result of the applicant's own action. here are two exceptional natural conditions that exist: the topography and the existing vegetation of the site. here are three exceptional land use encumbrances: the 1 wetlands buffer, the 2 height restriction overlay (from single family zoning), and the land area to be dedicated to onsolidation Avenue right-of-way. hese three land use encumbrances total 47.2% of the site area. Because of these special circumstances, which are not the result of the owner s actions, the strict application of the ordinance will deprive the property of rights and privileges enjoyed by other multifamily properties in the area. 2. Explain why the strict application of the Land Use Ordinance would deprive you of privileges possessed by owners of other property in the same land use designation and vicinity. We could design and build a project that meets the strict application of the height ordinance, but the neighborhood would have greater impacts and the site would be more densely developed. Please note that the project density is under the allowable number of units. Allowing the variance will allow for less building footprint area, and thus more open space, all without impacting the neighborhood. In fact, there are neighbors that support this proposal as it will improve their privileges on their property. We studied the possibility of constructing Buildings One and wo up to the 2 setback line from Puget Street. In that case, the ridges of the buildings would be 12 higher than where it is in this proposal. In other words, meeting the standard for height and setback would have an arguably greater impact on the neighborhood than what is being proposed in this variance request. he granting of this variance will not be unduly detrimental to the public welfare nor injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and subarea where the subject property is located. 3. Explain why the granting of said variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements of the vicinity or land use designation in which the subject property is located. Granting of this variance will actually be less detrimental to the public welfare and less injurious to the property and neighbors. he proposed project is less dense than is allowed, leaves more open space and natural areas than would otherwise be allowed, and likely improves the views of the easterly neighbors. Based on comments from our neighborhood meeting (1/3/13) the design of this project has already been revised to reduce impacts to the westerly neighbors. his revision is only possible if this

6 variance is approved. he subject property cannot be reasonably used under the regulations as written. It is our understanding that the 35-foot height restriction within the 2 height restriction overlay was written and intended for buildings constructed on a level grade with the neighboring single family dwellings. With the drop in grade on our property from the neighboring single family dwellings on Puget Street to our buildings, the perceived height of the buildings relative to the single family dwellings is diminished.

LIN O LN MOORE S 41S S S AS E M A P LE S S Y HLE DAE: WO: University Ridge Student Housing NEVADA S Ambling University Development Group 44H S MILON S 43RD S JEROME S 222 GRAND AVE.

7 LIN O LN MOORE S 41S S S AS E M A P LE S S Y HLE DAE: WO: University Ridge Student Housing NEVADA S Ambling University Development Group 44H S MILON S 43RD S JEROME S 222 GRAND AVE., SUIE, BELLINGHAM, WASHINGON PH.(36) FAX (36) Y I O R P PREPARED FOR: RS EDWARDS S BYRON AVE 46H S BYRON AVE OM 42ND S SA M IS H µ PUGE S PU G E S NEVADA S EDWARDS S HA W RS 47H S RS Y R E P SALE: 1 inch = 12 feet 1/3/213 SHEE: 1 of 1 116

$L:\Jepson Projects\211\116\cng\Drowings\ 116PROP.$

8 L:\Jepson Projects\211\116\cng\Drowings\ 116PROP.OWG HE USE OF HESE PLANS AND SPEIFlAIONS SHALL BE RESlRIED O HE ejp - APR 24, ORIGINAL SIE FOR WHIH HEY WERE PREPARED AND PUBLIAION HEREOF IS 11:55:47 EXPRESSLY LIMIED O SUH USE, REPRODUION, OR PUBLIAION BY ANY,, I.,,. MEI-IOD, IN WHOLE OR IN PAR. IS PROHIBIED. ill O HE PLANS AND SPEIFIAIONS REMAINS IN lhe ENGINEER \\IHOU PREJUDIE. VISUAL ONA WIH l-iese PLANS AND SPEIFIAllONS SHALL ONSlllUlE PRIMA FAIE EVIDENE OF l-ie AEPANE OF HESE RESRIIONS.,, I f.,,,, -. / _, t -.:... -'-"'-- - ::: - (/) -< I -., ::: (X).,;:--_ I (X) - c ),, -I (/) -I - ::: - (/) <., ::: (X) N _p... - c ) -I (/) -I "';:<""mm "r:' r""> "' r:' Ol ::: I... l!l -"' PREPARED FOR: AMBLING UNIVERSIY DEVELOPMEN GROUP RENDERINGS FROM PUGE SREE UNIVERSIY RIDGE SUDEN HOUSING BELLINGHAM, WA OUNY OF WHAOM WASHINGON!;; RONALD. JEPSON & ASSO.I PRELIMINARY IVIL ENGINEERING SURVEYING LAND PLANNING 222 GRAND AVENUE, SUIE, BELLINGHAM, WASHINGON FAX NO FOR ONSRUION " "> "m r:' i5 z "" z "' m., "" <= -< ""'J!l.,"-< <,... z <O - "' O> ':! ' "';Jl z i!s ""z ""

9 4 4 8 SALE: 1" = 4'

Land Use Application

Permit Center 210 Lottie Street, Bellingham, WA 98225 Phone: (360) 778-8300 Fax: (360) 778-8301 TTY: (360) 778-8382 Email: permits@cob.org Web: www.cob.org/permits Land Use Application Check all permits